Section 12 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 provides for ‘Determination of Specified Value’ which delineates the jurisdictional threshold for admitting commercial disputes to Commercial Courts. With respect to immovable property the Special Value as per Section 12 is determined according to the market value. This raises a question, which is, whether such determination impacts the valuation of suit for the purposes of court fees and jurisdiction?
This question was dealt with by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Soni Dave v. Trans Asian Industries Expositions Pvt. Ltd. wherein the Hon’ble Court observed that the Commercial Courts Act was not enacted for interfering with the Court Fees Act or the Suits Valuation Act. The Court further observed that it is settled principle of law that the provisions such as Section 21 (which provide for the Commercial Courts Act to have overriding effect) have to be read and interpreted by finding out the extent to which the legislature intended to give it an overriding effect and the context in which such a provision is made and on a consideration of purpose and policy underlying the enactment. The Hon’ble Court held that Section 12 of the Commercial Courts Act has to be read harmoniously with the Court Fees Act and the Suits Valuation Act and reading so, the specified value of a suit where the relief sought relates to immovable property or to a right thereunder has to be according to the market value of the immovable property only in such suits where the suit as per the Court Fees Act and/or the Suits Valuation Act has to be valued on the market value of the property. On the other hand if the Court Fees Act and/or the Suits Valuation Act provide for valuation of a suit without reference to the market value then Section 12 will not apply in such a case. In other words market value of immovable property would be taken into account for the purposes of Section 12 only in cases where the Court Fees Act and/or Suits Valuation Act also provide for taking the immovable property into account for the aforesaid purposes. This will not be the case for instance in a suit for recovery of rent where the valuation is not made on market value of the property but in the annual rent.